In a message dated 2/23/2008 12:31:52 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, thinboy00+wikipedialist@gmail.com writes:
Yes, he does need to better control his emotions in the short run. In the long run, we either need to make an exception to WP:CIVIL, accept that he will eventually go crazy and leave us with no bot>>
----------------------------------------- I find BCBot to be completely unneeded and counter-productive to the project.
If he would simply direct his efforts toward some *other issue*, that would be much more helpful, than this constant drama-engine he has created.
Will Johnson
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duf... 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
On 23/02/2008, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I find BCBot to be completely unneeded and counter-productive to the project. If he would simply direct his efforts toward some *other issue*, that would be much more helpful, than this constant drama-engine he has created.
The drama is entirely courtesy people invoking the hitherto-unknown "I WANNA!!" fair use clause in US copyright law. Oh wait, there isn't one?
The messages could be more helpful (e.g. naming this week's favoured template for the obvious keeps). But that's a detail on what is excellent and much-needed work.
I'm a big fan of fair use, on and off Wikipedia. There's an important place for it on en:wp. But there's so much crap in desperate need of a flamethrower.
- d.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 2:36 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The messages could be more helpful (e.g. naming this week's favoured template for the obvious keeps). But that's a detail on what is excellent and much-needed work.
What bugs me is that the people doing this work seem to care very little for the very common case that older fair-use images simply don't use whatever templates / jump through whatever hoops "policy" was re-written to require last week. That allied with the fact that many older images were contributed by people no longer with the project is a problem.
-Matt
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 2:36 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The messages could be more helpful (e.g. naming this week's favoured template for the obvious keeps). But that's a detail on what is excellent and much-needed work.
What bugs me is that the people doing this work seem to care very little for the very common case that older fair-use images simply don't use whatever templates / jump through whatever hoops "policy" was re-written to require last week. That allied with the fact that many older images were contributed by people no longer with the project is a problem.
I don't know how prevalent this is, but although I regularly check my talk page, I have long lost any motivation to jump through more hoops when it comes to old images. My position is: if it's worth keeping, someone will save it; if it's not, it's not a huge loss. Fair use rationales are not very useful anyway when they are practically all boilerplate these days.
Johnleemk